About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
at you, this was an al qaeda storm in the making. i'm very disappointed in our intelligence community, i think they failed in many ways, but with a little bit of inquiry and curiosity, i think it would be pretty clear that to explain this episode as related that created a mob that turned into a riot was far filled. and at the end of the day, we're going to get to the bottom of this. we have to have a system that we can trust. and if you don't know what happened, just say you don't know what happened. people can push you to give explanations and you can say i don't want to give bad information. here's what i can tell you -- the american people got bad information on 16 september, they got bad information from president obama days after, and the question is, should they have been giving the information at all? if you can do nothing but give bad information, isn't it better to give no information at all? so my belief is, not only is the information bad and i'm more convinced than ever that it was bad, it was unjustified to give the scenario as presented by ambassador rice and president obam
's talking points, following the benghazi incident. they claim links to al qaeda were left out for political purposes. but on tuesday, their conspiracy theory was blown out of the water. the spokeswoman for the director of national intelligence told cnn the white house wasn't involved in removing the information on al qaeda. he said the intelligence community made the changes. in responding to this report, mccain admitted that he was wrong, but still took a shot at the white house. he said intelligence officials, quote, told us they did not know who made the changes. now we have to read the answers to our questions in the media. this latest episode is another reason why many of us are so suspicious of actions of this administration when it comes to the benghazi attack. meanwhile, his sidekick, lindsey graham, is going into full attack mode. senator graham wrote a letter to president obama on tuesday, saying that he's concerned. many questions remain unanswered on the benghazi attacks. he says the president has a duty to the american people to answer the basic questions surrounding the bengha
that this was an yak. the intelligence community opted to leave specific reference to al qaeda and terrorism out of her presentation because they didn't want al qaeda to know that we knew what we knew. this is classic investigative philosophy. don't let the suspects know you suspect them. it's clear to me there was no mendacity by susan rice, no incompetence, there was no cover-up by the white house. to continue to argue there was any of that is now tin foil hat stuff. there is also now no will to filibuster to block rice. this is perhaps why john mccain has softened his tone. >> but you're saying that she could conceivably get your vote for secretary of state? >> i think she deserves the ability and the opportunity to explain herself and her position just as she said, but she's not the problem. the problem is the president of the united states. >> that's an end, i hope, to the vicious and baseless character attack that has made rice the center of a witch hunt by the right even though she has done nothing to disqualify herself. mccain tried to make her unnominatable but made it so obama will look weak
went on and basically defied what the president of libya said when he said al qaeda was involved. she said no. she continued to go back to this story that had to do with a spontaneous demonstration and about a bad video. and the bottom line is for secretary of state, you want somebody who actually can think about these issues, makes reasoned decisions, and asks tough questions. and i think she has failed that. and to me she has disqualified herself for secretary of state. >> here's what some democrats had to say about the rice nomination. let me play this for you, senator. >> i think it wouldn't be fair to disqualify her based on what she said on those sunday morning shows. >> i find it mind-boggling that some of the gop senators continue to go after her. it's completely unjustified. and i can only conclude that having failed to deny the president a second term they now want to deny him the cabinet of his choice. >> congressman schiff isn't the only one suggesting that opponents are playing politics with this. in addition to that, look, you've been on sunday talk show, you know how th
of the rewriting of those talking points was done by the fbi to take out al qaeda references, not by the zewe we had been told by the director of national intelligence came from the intelligence committee. it's worse than when she went up. she'll see bob corker, known to be bipartisan from tennessee and i don't think it'll be quite as vitriolic as yesterday. she felt she wanted to clear her name and she had been maligned and just been on morning television. that the real issue as jay carney was trying to say what happened before, what happened during but not what happened on sunday morning television programs and there is an investigation that hillary clinton has commissioned. it is a legally mandated investigation being led by none other than the former chairman, joint chief, mike ullin and co-chaired from mike pickering and deputy secretary of state. it's going to be coming out in mid-december and reported to congress and i understand it's going to be very tough on the state department for not ramping up security which many people believe could be the real issue here, not what was said on sund
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)